Supreme Court, especially Chief Justice Roberts, becomes more media friendly

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT/AP: High Court Becomes More Media Friendly
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: December 25, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Many Supreme Court justices prize the anonymity that comes with their lifetime appointments and camera-free courtroom. Unrecognized, justices have snapped pictures for tourists in front of the court or been asked to move out of the way of a shot.

On rare occasion, a justice might consent to an interview on the C-SPAN cable network to discuss a recent book or be shown addressing a lawyers' gathering somewhere.

Lately, however, some members of the court have been popping up in unusual places -- including network television news programs -- and talking about more than just the law.

For an institution that has kept the media at a comfortable distance for much of its existence, the Supreme Court's increasingly public face is astonishing, said University of Chicago law professor Dennis Hutchinson, who served as a law clerk for Justices Byron White and William Douglas.

''More and more, the justices are spending time talking off the bench informally to reporters, on the record, off the record, in public, on tape, on film,'' Hutchinson said....

Perhaps most noteworthy...has been the media-friendly attitude adoped by new Chief Justice John Roberts, in contrast to his predecessor William Rehnquist. Roberts recently was featured on ABC News' Nightline discussing both his view of the court and his son Jack's Spiderman imitation at Roberts' introduction by President Bush....

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Scotus-Image-Remake.html

[Gabi Hayes]

1. why isn't that pig fucker up on perjury charges?

http://www.nationalbar.org/news/releases/release090605.shtml

NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION URGES U.S. SENATE TO WITHHOLD CONFIRMATION OF JUDGE JOHN G. ROBERTS UNTIL SATISFIED NOMINEE WILL PROTECT EQUAL JUSTICE, CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES


WASHINGTON, DC - The National Bar Association urges the U.S. Senate to withhold confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. for appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, until the nominee has established unequivocally that he meets high and exacting standards for appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, including a commitment to civil rights, civil liberties and equal justice under law. The NBA's review of Judge Roberts' record thus far reveals evidence of profound racial, gender and cultural insensitivity, judicial activism, and ideological extremism, with an agenda to reverse well-settled jurisprudence on civil rights and liberties, Congressional powers under the Commerce Clause, privacy, separation of church and state, and federal jurisdiction. In sum, Judge Roberts' record raises significant and troubling questions regarding his qualifications for appointment to the Nation's highest court.

The U.S. Senate has an explicit Constitutional duty to "advise and consent" to the President's choice of Judge Roberts. The stakes could not be higher. If the Senate confirms a nominee who does not meet the high and exacting standards essential for service as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, the decision is enormously and irreversibly harmful. The confirmation hearing must be a comprehensive examination, not simply a procedural formality. Therefore, the Senate confirmation vote should occur only after the following:

(1) exhaustive, critical and direct questioning by Senators;
(2) candid, not evasive answers by the nominee;
(3) thoughtful consideration of public views;
(4) thorough review of all required documents that have been requested by the members of Congress, the media and the public; and
(5) a full public debate on the nominee's qualifications, background and judicial philosophy.


wouldn't it have been nice if ONE of our fabulous senators had followed these guidelines during that lying pigfucker's nomination charade?

oh....merry christmas, all!

[tritsofme]

2. I agreed with the sentiments expressed

but what does it have to do with perjury?